From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6935: 24.0.50; doc for `font-lock-maximum-decoration' Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:33:00 +0200 Message-ID: References: <0AEEE18115BA49E58E42C1604867D444@us.oracle.com> <94F453208A4B4F70B7C5F87CB2BE541C@us.oracle.com> <25DFEB9F124E49EA82BB01E0A16107C0@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1283251248 26348 80.91.229.12 (31 Aug 2010 10:40:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6935@debbugs.gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 31 12:40:46 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqOGj-0000sp-Cl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:40:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39392 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OqOGi-000586-Qr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:40:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50838 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OqOFl-0004rr-OG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:39:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqOFk-0007lA-IU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:39:45 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:56804) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqOFk-0007l6-H2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:39:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqO8I-0005g0-In; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:32:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:32:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6935 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6935-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6935.128325069121812 (code B ref 6935); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:32:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6935) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2010 10:31:31 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqO7n-0005fl-0l for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:31:31 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqO7k-0005ff-1W for 6935@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:31:28 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (vpn-132-204-232-70.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.70]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o7VAX1MC003395; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:33:02 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 94923660DF; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:33:00 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <25DFEB9F124E49EA82BB01E0A16107C0@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:56:07 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3611=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:32:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:39854 Archived-At: > But you apparently disagree with yourself in that case, since you > argue both for letting them move to a lower level and not letting them > change level at all (no levels). Not I do not argue for them to be able to lower the level. That's just the functionality currently provided, and which I dislike. > Be specific. Which different font-lock features for which mode? > You're just hand-waving, saying that we could split fontification into > a set of "features" rather than a set of levels. Sounds fine at that > level of abstraction (simply replacing numeric "levels" by boolean > "features"), but the proof is in the pudding. I see no need for being more specific: whenever a particular need arises, we add a corresponding config. > Sure, there are lots of such considerations. I don't oppose > a superior design that gives users _more_ control over what gets > highlighted, where, how much, etc. I'm glad we agree. > But where's the beef? Where's the specific proposal? Don't just say > we should drop the user control we do offer without offering something > better. Strawman. Stefan